Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

[Poiuytrewq]

The FADS system if it works could change everything.

what is the FADS system?

Early days

https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/ds ... dominance/

[Caribbean]

Inshore Patrol Ships

New role you invision the navy needing?

I think we are talking Archer Class replacement. Personally I would like to see the URNU task taken over by 15 or 18m SEA-class vessels with training modules (or perhaps even 20m RhIBs, as used by the Border Force) and a larger inshore patrol vessel to replace the Archers

[Poiuytrewq]

…the third flattop….

If Govan keep building Tier1 escorts at an 18 month drumbeat (£7bn per decade) and Rosyth stop the T31 build at 8x hulls around 2031 it gives RN £5bn to build non escort vessels at Rosyth and Belfast between 2031-2041.

A third flattop would be a real possibility if RN took that option but with £5bn over that decade there are lots of options.

[wargame_insomniac]

Inshore Patrol Ships

New role you invision the navy needing?

I think we are talking Archer Class replacement. Personally I would like to see the URNU task taken over by 15 or 18m SEA-class vessels with training modules (or perhaps even 20m RhIBs, as used by the Border Force) and a larger inshore patrol vessel to replace the Archers

Lower end yes, but also larger 40-60m ships. The Littoral area is going to be key so a multi role ship that can not only act in a patrol role, but also act as a MCM / ASW USV / UUV mothership, options to act as a small RM forward base and move supplies for HADR. Keep it cheap, perhaps a derivatives of the Damen Stan Patrol designs.

[Caribbean]

Lower end yes, but also larger 40-60m ships. The Littoral area is going to be key so a multi role ship that can not only act in a patrol role, but also act as a MCM / ASW USV / UUV mothership, options to act as a small RM forward base and move supplies for HADR. Keep it cheap, perhaps a derivatives of the Damen Stan Patrol designs.

Very similar to my thoughts. Not so sure about HADR, but certianly should have the ability to carry offboards systems (or even mine-laying rails) & be able to assist in small unit operations.

[Repulse]

Lower end yes, but also larger 40-60m ships. The Littoral area is going to be key so a multi role ship that can not only act in a patrol role, but also act as a MCM / ASW USV / UUV mothership, options to act as a small RM forward base and move supplies for HADR. Keep it cheap, perhaps a derivatives of the Damen Stan Patrol designs.

Very similar to my thoughts. Not so sure about HADR, but certianly should have the ability to carry offboards systems (or even mine-laying rails) & be able to assist in small unit operations.

HADR would be primarily for moving medical supplies and teams, plus 1-2 containers, but low scale stuff.

In a lot of ways it be similar to the D'Entrecasteaux class.

[new guy]

Inshore Patrol Ships

New role you invision the navy needing?

I think we are talking Archer Class replacement. Personally I would like to see the URNU task taken over by 15 or 18m SEA-class vessels with training modules (or perhaps even 20m RhIBs, as used by the Border Force) and a larger inshore patrol vessel to replace the Archers

for the IPV, what exactly are we talking about?

VSP: https://defbrief.com/2020/01/18/french- ... t-vessels/
26m: https://www.mindef.gov.sg/web/portal/mi ... 9dec21_fs2
28m: https://couach.com/en/2800-fpb-asw-2/
40m: https://www.austal.com/sites/default/fi ... 0Sheet.pdf
60m: https://opv.austal.com/wp-content/uploa ... y-2022.pdf
MMIPV: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrior-c ... rol_vessel
80m: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independe ... ion_vessel
5007: https://vesselconfigurator.damen.com/co ... IuNDQuMC4w

[Repulse]

As always a lot will depend on the requirements, some of which are still be validated as part of the RN POD experimentation and FCF exercises. Also, kit such as UUVs are still in their infancy. However we already have the Sea Class, so I’m thinking primarily in the 40-80m range (like Patrick Blackett).

One comment I would make, is that we shouldn’t be bound by what we perceive patrol ships to be, I think there is a difference between these and the OPV role for example. Basically, most ship designs with the basic kit can do the patrol role, as such I wouldn’t rule out adapting small landing ship designs in our list of potentials.

[Tempest414]

I was thinking more a 52 meter FCS like XV Patrick Blackett we know she can carry two TEU's so the hope would be the 52 meter ship could carry 4

fit them with a X1 radar and RWS that can take any of these 12.7mm , 30mm , 40mm GMG plus maybe 2 x LMM

the ability to carry TEU's or 2 x ORC would be a good thing

[new guy]

As always a lot will depend on the requirements, some of which are still be validated as part of the RN POD experimentation and FCF exercises. Also, kit such as UUVs are still in their infancy. However we already have the Sea Class, so I’m thinking primarily in the 40-80m range (like Patrick Blackett).

One comment I would make, is that we shouldn’t be bound by what we perceive patrol ships to be, I think there is a difference between these and the OPV role for example. Basically, most ship designs with the basic kit can do the patrol role, as such I wouldn’t rule out adapting small landing ship designs in our list of potentials.

Could you help define the role more?
Constabulary?
RM roles?
Overlap with OPV?

one the comment of landing ship, this reminds me of something.

The french have an idea for 4 Light Force Projection Ships: During the 2023 parliamentary review of the 2024-30 LPM, several amendments were adopted to add a program for light amphibious ships capable of landing on beaches with no major port infrastructure to existing plans in order to restore the rapid intra-theater transport of troops and cargo capabilities, for French overseas territories.

So a fast, medium size, landing ship, with capacity for PODS? Island hoping? Light USMC Landing Ship Medium / Light Amphibious Warship esqe?


https://www.opex360.com/2023/05/27/lpm- ... de-forces/
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... aks-cover/

[wargame_insomniac]

As always a lot will depend on the requirements, some of which are still be validated as part of the RN POD experimentation and FCF exercises. Also, kit such as UUVs are still in their infancy. However we already have the Sea Class, so I’m thinking primarily in the 40-80m range (like Patrick Blackett).

One comment I would make, is that we shouldn’t be bound by what we perceive patrol ships to be, I think there is a difference between these and the OPV role for example. Basically, most ship designs with the basic kit can do the patrol role, as such I wouldn’t rule out adapting small landing ship designs in our list of potentials.

The Sea Class boats are a great example of using the same basic hulls at various sizes (11m / 13m / 15m / 18m) with common components and control system but equipped with different modules for varying uses. The common components and controls enables simplified training, logistics and maintenance. The modules used include ARCIMS for autonomous minehunting plus survey, passenger transport and dive support.

https://www.navylookout.com/in-focus-th ... oyal-navy/

This is the same sort of thing that manufacturers such as Damen and Vard have done well, offering a portfolio of ships at varying sizes and for varying tasks, but allowing for common components and control systems and sensors etc.

I did wonder if the RN was trying this out when they purchased the commercial Damen Fast Crew Supplier FCS 4008 for XV Patrick Blackett as a testbed for experimental autonomous systems. But then we have bought two quite different commercial Vard designs for MROSS and MCMV.

But I agree if RN can find a suitable equivalent of the Sea Class Boats for smaller ships in the 50m - 80m range length and go for different modules, possibly involving the RN’s PODS containres concept (Persistent Operational Deployment Systems), thse would be ideal for UK Patrol Vessels, MCMV and for deploying many of the smaller UAV/USV/USuV that the RN has been experimenting with.

(Admitedly the larger ULUUV such as Cestus will probobably require a larger ship with larger beam to able to deploy in varying sea states).

[Repulse]

Could you help define the role more?
Constabulary?
RM roles?
Overlap with OPV?

one the comment of landing ship, this reminds me of something.

The french have an idea for 4 Light Force Projection Ships: During the 2023 parliamentary review of the 2024-30 LPM, several amendments were adopted to add a program for light amphibious ships capable of landing on beaches with no major port infrastructure to existing plans in order to restore the rapid intra-theater transport of troops and cargo capabilities, for French overseas territories.

So a fast, medium size, landing ship, with capacity for PODS? Island hoping? Light USMC Landing Ship Medium / Light Amphibious Warship esqe?


https://www.opex360.com/2023/05/27/lpm- ... de-forces/
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... aks-cover/

All good points, and I don’t have all the answers on the detailed requirements, just that I can see a high level gap and requirement that overlaps with what we are expecting from the LSVs, and from the FCF / future amphibious discussion (especially operating on areas such as the Norwegian Fjords / Baltic).

For me, there is no overlap with the OPVs as they are effectively global patrol boats capable of operating in and traversing oceans; these are littoral vessels optimised for operating in shallow waters. Also, I’ve been thinking that these should also have a rear ramp for loading / unloading stores and vehicles (like the US Light Amphibious Warship concept).

The kind of scale would ideally be capable of handling two LCVP / MCM USVs, plus 2 20ft ISO containers or 30 RMs with light vehicles. Also, a UAV / Vetrep deck with a small UAV hangar. Systems wise a 40/57mm plus light 3D radar.

[new guy]

Could you help define the role more?
Constabulary?
RM roles?
Overlap with OPV?

one the comment of landing ship, this reminds me of something.

The french have an idea for 4 Light Force Projection Ships: During the 2023 parliamentary review of the 2024-30 LPM, several amendments were adopted to add a program for light amphibious ships capable of landing on beaches with no major port infrastructure to existing plans in order to restore the rapid intra-theater transport of troops and cargo capabilities, for French overseas territories.

So a fast, medium size, landing ship, with capacity for PODS? Island hoping? Light USMC Landing Ship Medium / Light Amphibious Warship esqe?


https://www.opex360.com/2023/05/27/lpm- ... de-forces/
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... aks-cover/

All good points, and I don’t have all the answers on the detailed requirements, just that I can see a high level gap and requirement that overlaps with what we are expecting from the LSVs, and from the FCF / future amphibious discussion (especially operating on areas such as the Norwegian Fjords / Baltic).

For me, there is no overlap with the OPVs as they are effectively global patrol boats capable of operating in and traversing oceans; these are littoral vessels optimised for operating in shallow waters. Also, I’ve been thinking that these should also have a rear ramp for loading / unloading stores and vehicles (like the US Light Amphibious Warship concept).

The kind of scale would ideally be capable of handling two LCVP / MCM USVs, plus 2 20ft ISO containers or 30 RMs with light vehicles. Also, a UAV / Vetrep deck with a small UAV hangar. Systems wise a 40/57mm plus light 3D radar.

. Need for B1 reps? Those are capable of operating in and traversing oceans, should these be able to take there role or displaced OPV's/GPV's?

. How do they fit into the RN.

. Ignoring beaching capability for a moment, essencially a smaller GPV?

Say the GPV has a larger work deck, merlin capable flight deck, larger Crew and EMF, while these lets call them LMV's,
have smaller work deck, UAV flight deck, smaller EMF, smaller crew?

A sandown / hunt type of divide?

what forward deploying potential do they have?
. BOT's, like the french?
. anecdote of the sundowns being deployed in MCM kipon?

your proposal sounds quite close to the independence class ( Singapore, Littoral Mission Vessel)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independe ... ion_vessel

. 76mm gun
. 25 crew
. 30 EMF
. Designed for littoral ops
. SHORAD / MLRS vls.
2x 12.7mm guns
. Some work deck area, especially if there is an area under the flight deck.


Question is, is this all that is needed for GPV or LSV, thus negating the need for a larger class for them?

I am starting to see the logic in a ~80m, 'light' patrol vessel, ~100m Global patrol vessel/ LSV.

As for beaching, I believe that should be served by a separate vessel, see, the french.

[wargame_insomniac]

Could you help define the role more?
Constabulary?
RM roles?
Overlap with OPV?

one the comment of landing ship, this reminds me of something.

The french have an idea for 4 Light Force Projection Ships: During the 2023 parliamentary review of the 2024-30 LPM, several amendments were adopted to add a program for light amphibious ships capable of landing on beaches with no major port infrastructure to existing plans in order to restore the rapid intra-theater transport of troops and cargo capabilities, for French overseas territories.

So a fast, medium size, landing ship, with capacity for PODS? Island hoping? Light USMC Landing Ship Medium / Light Amphibious Warship esqe?


https://www.opex360.com/2023/05/27/lpm- ... de-forces/
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... aks-cover/

All good points, and I don’t have all the answers on the detailed requirements, just that I can see a high level gap and requirement that overlaps with what we are expecting from the LSVs, and from the FCF / future amphibious discussion (especially operating on areas such as the Norwegian Fjords / Baltic).

For me, there is no overlap with the OPVs as they are effectively global patrol boats capable of operating in and traversing oceans; these are littoral vessels optimised for operating in shallow waters. Also, I’ve been thinking that these should also have a rear ramp for loading / unloading stores and vehicles (like the US Light Amphibious Warship concept).

The kind of scale would ideally be capable of handling two LCVP / MCM USVs, plus 2 20ft ISO containers or 30 RMs with light vehicles. Also, a UAV / Vetrep deck with a small UAV hangar. Systems wise a 40/57mm plus light 3D radar.

. Need for B1 reps? Those are capable of operating in and traversing oceans, should these be able to take there role or displaced OPV's/GPV's?

. How do they fit into the RN.

. Ignoring beaching capability for a moment, essencially a smaller GPV?

Say the GPV has a larger work deck, merlin capable flight deck, larger Crew and EMF, while these lets call them LMV's,
have smaller work deck, UAV flight deck, smaller EMF, smaller crew?

A sandown / hunt type of divide?

what forward deploying potential do they have?
. BOT's, like the french?
. anecdote of the sundowns being deployed in MCM kipon?

your proposal sounds quite close to the independence class ( Singapore, Littoral Mission Vessel)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independe ... ion_vessel

. 76mm gun
. 25 crew
. 30 EMF
. Designed for littoral ops
. SHORAD / MLRS vls.
2x 12.7mm guns
. Some work deck area, especially if there is an area under the flight deck.


Question is, is this all that is needed for GPV or LSV, thus negating the need for a larger class for them?

I am starting to see the logic in a ~80m, 'light' patrol vessel, ~100m Global patrol vessel/ LSV.

As for beaching, I believe that should be served by a separate vessel, see, the french.

I agree.

For "~80m, 'light' patrol vessel", I think we need 4 to replace the River B1s as UK Patrol Vessels, plu so to replace Hunt / Sandown MCMV in both UK waters and for Operation Kipion. Armanent would be light - would have previously said one * 20mm or 30mm main gun (maybe this gets updated to 40mm Bofors purely on the grounds of compatability with T31 Frigates and presumably future vessels), with a pair of 12.7mm HMG as back up.
-For patrol vessels would need a cheap UAV to extend ISTAR range and at least two RIB for boarding parties.
-For MCMV would need to carry two ARCIMS USuV


For "~100m Global patrol vessel/ LSV" would like a hangar connected to boat bay for a simple Multi Mission Bay, ideally with way of moving RN PODS containers from flight deck to hangar / boat bay.

I am assuming that Merlins will be a precious resource restricted to main UK based carriers and escorts. Therefore I am hoping that firstly, IF RN can increase their manpower levels for trained helicopter pilots and support crew, and thus secondly, therefore the RN would be able to utilise any additional Wildcats transferred from Army Air Corps once marinised. Obviously in the medium to longer term any such manned helicopters are likely to be replaced by unmanned UAV.

Armanent could be 1*57mm main gun and 1*40mm as backup / CIWS (again on grounds of compatability with T31 Frigates), with PODS used to provide any mision specific equipment.

[Tempest414]

I think we are tripping over our selves here the RB1's should be replaced with say a 75 to 85 meter design and the RB2's should be upgraded with 3D radar and 40mm gun but being this is the Amphib thread the question is what could be done with the Archer replacement to add to the Littoral

Or if we are talking about how the Archer replacement can help the UK in shore then we need to move threads

[shark bait]

For "~80m, 'light' patrol vessel", I think we need 4 to replace the River B1s as UK Patrol Vessels

The Navy shouldn't be doing this, they have lots of other things to worry about. The Police, Border force, or a Coastguard should be responsible for law enforcement around the UK.

what could be done with the Archer replacement to add to the Littoral

Nothing. The Archers are about as useful to the Marines as the Short Tucano is to QRA.

[Tempest414]

For "~80m, 'light' patrol vessel", I think we need 4 to replace the River B1s as UK Patrol Vessels

The Navy shouldn't be doing this, they have lots of other things to worry about. The Police, Border force, or a Coastguard should be responsible for law enforcement around the UK.

what could be done with the Archer replacement to add to the Littoral

Nothing. The Archers are about as useful to the Marines as the Short Tucano is to QRA.

We will need OPV's in UK waters even if it is to just escort Russian ships around the UK freeing up escorts for more important tasks

As for the Archer question I have not made up my mind

[Caribbean]

We seem to be conflating RB1 replacement with P2000 replacement.

Basically, what do P2000s do? As far as I can see, they provide armed patrol at Faslane, URNU, public engagement, junior officer command training & have been perticipating in exercises recently, though it looks as if they have largely been used in an aggressor "swarm" role

If the URNU function were to go to something like the SEA boats, could the P2000 replacement be more useful, militarily?

Maybe we should be looking at a design closer to the boats being built for Ukraine, or something more focussed on small raiding parties, but with sufficient teeth to survive in that environment (trying deperately to stay on topic)

I don't think there will be a B1 replacement, but if there were, it would need to be pretty similar overall to the B1s in dimensions, to handle the sea conditions, though maybe with improved rescue & casualty handling facilities.

[Poiuytrewq]

We seem to be conflating RB1 replacement with P2000 replacement.

Also worth considering the possibility of a wider role.

Each floodable well dock in the Albions can accommodate two vessels of 60mX7.5m or 4x 30mX7.5m.

The Bays can accommodate one vessels 30mX7.5m or 4x 15mX3.5m (CIC)

Obviously draft and superstructure dimensions are critical but what will the FCF actually need?

If it transpired that larger well docks and larger (30m-60m) fast patrol/support craft were needed, straightforward Albion conversions should also not be discounted to give the FCF what is needed over the next decade.

A simple Albion conversation could provide:

• Add 3x fixed hangers facilitating 3x Merlin OR 2x Merlin plus 2x Wildcat.

• 50m flight deck maintained with 2x Merlin landing spots (offset).

• 4x 30m fast support craft plus 4x CIC in davits

• An EMF of over 400

Much more to consider than just replacing what is already in the water.

[Repulse]

. Need for B1 reps? Those are capable of operating in and traversing oceans, should these be able to take there role or displaced OPV's/GPV's?

. How do they fit into the RN.

. Ignoring beaching capability for a moment, essencially a smaller GPV?

Say the GPV has a larger work deck, merlin capable flight deck, larger Crew and EMF, while these lets call them LMV's,
have smaller work deck, UAV flight deck, smaller EMF, smaller crew?

A sandown / hunt type of divide?

what forward deploying potential do they have?
. BOT's, like the french?
. anecdote of the sundowns being deployed in MCM kipon?

your proposal sounds quite close to the independence class ( Singapore, Littoral Mission Vessel)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independe ... ion_vessel

. 76mm gun
. 25 crew
. 30 EMF
. Designed for littoral ops
. SHORAD / MLRS vls.
2x 12.7mm guns
. Some work deck area, especially if there is an area under the flight deck.


Question is, is this all that is needed for GPV or LSV, thus negating the need for a larger class for them?

I am starting to see the logic in a ~80m, 'light' patrol vessel, ~100m Global patrol vessel/ LSV.

As for beaching, I believe that should be served by a separate vessel, see, the french.

Firstly the Independence Class cost £300mn each (based on a batch of 8), plus they were built in more efficient yards, so definitely no I don’t have that in mind. Must be £100mn or less, and must be built in enough numbers to make it viable from an efficiency standpoint.

In terms of these taking the role of the B1 Rivers, my answer would be partly. Training navigation and near shore patrolling yes, but would want two B2s to complement for operations further out.

To free up the 2 B2s I would replace the ones operating in the Caribbean and Gibraltar with one or more of these vessels as I believe they could be better suited for the roles.

[donald_of_tokyo]

For Dutch, MRSS is a replacement for 4 Holland-class OPV and 2 LPDs. Thus, it will be something like Crossover, or New Chillian-navy Amphibious & Military Sea Transport Vessel.

- a shortened version of Vard 7 313, added with "an integrated well-dock"
- cannot find the source, but I remember it is 18knots top speed.

Will be a good candidate for both Caribbean patrol, Gibraltar patrol (visiting west Africa), and also for MRSS. I like to see "some of" the MRSS being this kind of vessels.

https://vardmarine.com/amphibious-and-m ... -contract/

[Jackstar]

Griffon Hoverwork has announced development of a new hovercraft – the Wyvern Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC), representing a solution for rapid amphibious transport.

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/nava ... vern-lcac/

[Poiuytrewq]

…cannot find the source, but I remember it is 18knots top speed.

892A3E38-F601-4F97-B40A-14F1DE1DC43B.jpeg

Will be a good candidate for both Caribbean patrol, Gibraltar patrol (visiting west Africa), and also for MRSS. I like to see "some of" the MRSS being this kind of vessels.

Completely agree. The Vard 7 313 is a bit more capable but the cost could be the deciding factor.

IMO 4 are needed unless the 3 LSV’s are included and become a class of 7. Perhaps a mixed procurement of two variants based on the same hull would be worth consideration. One thing is for sure, Vard will rapidly adapt a design to RN’s requirements with minimal fuss and cost.

[Tempest414]

We seem to be conflating RB1 replacement with P2000 replacement.

Basically, what do P2000s do? As far as I can see, they provide armed patrol at Faslane, URNU, public engagement, junior officer command training & have been perticipating in exercises recently, though it looks as if they have largely been used in an aggressor "swarm" role

If the URNU function were to go to something like the SEA boats, could the P2000 replacement be more useful, militarily?

Maybe we should be looking at a design closer to the boats being built for Ukraine, or something more focussed on small raiding parties, but with sufficient teeth to survive in that environment (trying deperately to stay on topic)

I don't think there will be a B1 replacement, but if there were, it would need to be pretty similar overall to the B1s in dimensions, to handle the sea conditions, though maybe with improved rescue & casualty handling facilities.

We need to remember that we now have the CIC program running with a 200 million budget

https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/cn ... craft-cic/

[SW1]

Just as a reference and interesting exercise to look at considering the direction of travel and the relevance of some equipment.

https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2023 ... ic/390302/

This was the second iteration of Operation Polar Dagger and this year’s version of the operation was larger than last year’s, bringing in the John P. Murtha LPD 26 transport ship and an AC-130 plane in order to build out faster intelligence, communications and operations between the air, sea and ground. One of the chief goals of the operation was to show improved “domain awareness,” said Tucker, “to understand what's being seen in the air is effectively communicated to the forces on the ground. And then the opposite of that, that the forces on the ground are able to communicate their perception of domain awareness to the forces in the air … The second aspect would be our ability to deliver effects kinetic or nonkinetic, from air to ground, in support of the ground forces, or ultimately in supporting the mission of the air components.”